Geoengineering Moratorium Agreed at UN Ministerial in Japan

NAGOYA, Japan – In a landmark consensus decision, the 193-member UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) will close its tenth biennial meeting with a de facto moratorium on geoengineering projects and experiments. “Any private or public experimentation or adventurism intended to manipulate the planetary thermostat will be in violation of this carefully crafted UN consensus,” stated Silvia Ribeiro, Latin American Director of ETC Group.

The agreement, reached during the ministerial portion of the two-week meeting which included 110 environment ministers, asks governments to ensure that no geoengineering activities take place until risks to the environmental and biodiversity and associated social, cultural and economic impacts risks have been appropriately considered as well as the socio-economic impacts. The CBD secretariat was also instructed to report back on various geoengineering proposals and potential intergovernmental regulatory measures.

The unusually strong consensus decision builds on the 2008 moratorium on ocean fertilization. That agreement, negotiated at COP 9 in Bonn, put the brakes on a litany of failed “experiments” – both public and private – to sequester atmospheric carbon dioxide in the oceans’ depths by spreading nutrients on the sea surface. Since then, attention has turned to a range of futuristic proposals to block a percentage of solar radiation via large-scale interventions in the atmosphere, stratosphere and outer space that would alter global temperatures and precipitation patterns.

“This decision clearly places the governance of geoengineering in the United Nations where it belongs,” said ETC Group Executive Director Pat Mooney.

“This decision is a victory for common sense, and for precaution. It will not inhibit legitimate scientific research. Decisions on geoengineering cannot be made by small groups of scientists from a small group of countries that establish self-serving ‘voluntary guidelines’ on climate hacking. What little credibility such efforts may have had in some policy circles in the global North has been shattered by this decision. The UK Royal Society and its partners should cancel their Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative and respect that the world’s governments have collectively decided that future deliberations on geoengineering should take place in the UN, where all countries have a seat at the table and where civil society can watch and influence what they are doing.”

Delegates in Nagoya have now clearly understood the potential threat that deployment – or even field testing – of geoengineering technologies poses to the protection of biodiversity. The decision was hammered out in long and difficult late night sessions of a “Friends of the chair” group, attended by ETC Group, and adopted by the Working Group 1 Plenary on 27 October 2010. The Chair of the climate and biodiversity negotiations called the final text “a highly delicate compromise.” All that remains to do now is gavel it through in the final plenary at 6 PM Friday (Nagoya time).

“The decision is not perfect,” said Neth Dano of ETC Group Philippines. “Some delegations are understandably concerned that the interim definition of geoengineering is too narrow because it does not include Carbon Capture and Storage technologies. Before the next CBD meeting, there will be ample opportunity to consider these questions in more detail. But climate techno-fixes are now firmly on the UN agenda and will lead to important debates as the 20th anniversary of the Earth Summit approaches. A change of course is essential, and geoengineering is clearly not the way forward.”

####

The full texts of the relevant decisions on geoengineering are copied below:

Under Climate Change and Biodiversity (UNEP/CBD/COP/10/L.36)

8. Invites Parties and other Governments, according to national circumstance and priorities, as well as relevant organizations and processes, to consider the guidance below on ways to conserve, sustainably use and restore biodiversity and ecosystem services while contributing to climate‑change mitigation and adaptation:
…. Ensure, in line and consistent with decision IX/16 C, on ocean fertilization and biodiversity and climate change, in the absence of science based, global, transparent and effective control and regulatory mechanisms for geo-engineering, and in accordance with the precautionary approach and Article 14 of the Convention, that no climate-related geo-engineering activities[1] that may affect biodiversity take place, until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities and appropriate consideration of the associated risks for the environment and biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural impacts, with the exception of small scale scientific research studies that would be conducted in a controlled setting in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention, and only if they are justified by the need to gather specific scientific data and are subject to a thorough prior assessment of the potential impacts on the environment;

[1] Without prejudice to future deliberations on the definition of geo-engineering activities, understanding that any technologies that deliberately reduce solar insolation or increase carbon sequestration from the atmosphere on a large scale that may affect biodiversity (excluding carbon capture and storage from fossil fuels when it captures carbon dioxide before it is released into the atmosphere) should be considered as forms of geo-engineering which are relevant to the Convention on Biological Diversity until a more precise definition can be developed. Noting that solar insolation is defined as a measure of solar radiation energy received on a given surface area in a given hour and that carbon sequestration is defined as the process of increasing the carbon content of a reservoir/pool other than the atmosphere.

AND

9 9. Requests the Executive Secretary to:
….
(o) Compile and synthesize available scientific information, and views and experiences of indigenous and local communities and other stakeholders, on the possible impacts of geo‑engineering techniques on biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural considerations, and options on definitions and understandings of climate-related geo-engineering relevant to the Convention on Biological Diversity and make it available for consideration at a meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice prior to the eleventh meeting of the Conference of the Parties;

(p) Taking into account the possible need for science based global, transparent and effective control and regulatory mechanisms, subject to the availability of financial resources, undertake a study on gaps in such existing mechanisms for climate-related geo-engineering relevant to the Convention on Biological Diversity, bearing in mind that such mechanisms may not be best placed under the Convention on Biological Diversity, for consideration by the Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice prior to a future meeting of the Conference of the Parties and to communicate the results to relevant organizations;

Under New and Emerging Issues UNEP/CBD/COP/10/L.2 :

4. Invites Parties, other Governments and relevant organizations to submit information on synthetic biology and geo-engineering, for the consideration by the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, in accordance with the procedures of decision IX/29, while applying the precautionary approach to the field release of synthetic life, cell or genome into the environment;

Under Marine and Coastal Biodiversity UNEP/CBD/COP/10/L.42

13. Reaffirming that the programme of work still corresponds to the global priorities, has been further strengthened through decisions VIII/21, VIII/22, VIII/24, and IX/20, but is not fully implemented, and therefore encourages Parties to continue to implement these programme elements, and endorses the following guidance, where applicable and in accordance with national capacity and circumstances, for enhanced implementation:

(e) Ensuring that no ocean fertilization takes place unless in accordance with decision IX/16 C and taking note of the report (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/14/INF/7) and development noted para 57 – 62;

Impacts of ocean fertilization on marine and coastal biodiversity

57. Welcomes the report on compilation and synthesis of available scientific information on potential impacts of direct human-induced ocean fertilization on marine biodiversity (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/14/INF/7), which was prepared in collaboration with United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) and the International Maritime Organization in pursuance of paragraph 3 of decision IX/20;

58. Recalling the important decision IX/16 C on ocean fertilization, reaffirming the precautionary approach, recognizes that given the scientific uncertainty that exists, significant concern surrounds the potential intended and unintended impacts of large-scale ocean fertilization on marine ecosystem structure and function, including the sensitivity of species and habitats and the physiological changes induced by micro-nutrient and macro-nutrient additions to surface waters as well as the possibility of persistent alteration of an ecosystem, and requests Parties to implement decision IX/16 C;

59. Notes that the governing bodies under the London Convention and Protocol adopted in 2008 resolution LC-LP.1 (2008) on the regulation of ocean fertilization, in which Contracting Parties declared, inter alia, that given the present state of knowledge, ocean fertilization activities other than legitimate scientific research should not be allowed;

60. Recognizes the work under way within the context of the London Convention and London Protocol to contribute to the development of a regulatory mechanism referred to in decision IX/16 C, and invites Parties and other Governments to act in accordance with the Resolution LC-LP.2(2010) of the London Convention and Protocol ;

61. Notes that in order to provide reliable predictions on the potential adverse impacts on marine biodiversity of activities involving ocean fertilization, further work to enhance our knowledge and modelling of ocean biogeochemical processes is required, in accordance with decision IX/16 (c) and taking into account decision IX/20 and LC-LP.2 (2010);

62. Notes also that there is a pressing need for research to advance our understanding of marine ecosystem dynamics and the role of the ocean in the global carbon cycle;

Also see the new film What in the World Are They Spraying?Watch the entire film by G. Edward Griffin, Michael J. Murphy, and Paul Whittenberger. (2010, 98 mins). Go HERE to purchase a DVD, make copies, and spread the word.

Washington Post 10/29: “The prohibition does not apply to the United States, which has yet to ratify the convention.”

100 responses to “BREAKING: UN Bans Chemtrails”

Many researchers have posited a change in the application of chemtrails and possibly invisible aircraft where the spray is sky blue in the daytime, pink at dusk etc. We will have to hold their feet to the fire on this one.

What great insite bro! I always wondered about the carbon capture ultimate goal. Thanx for posting. If you get this reply, contact me. Click my name to do it via that website {guestbook or feedback} or message me on YouTube: SprayOClockNews {nospray.info goes direct to channel} People need to QUICKLY understand what a threat this warming bullshit is! Exerpts from 1992 POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF GREENHOUSE WARMING {links to entire volume and the excerpts at KillerSpray com/climategate click on The Anvil above this post}: “losses of millions of lives acceptable….spraying barium and aluminum most cost effective…” and public law 185 {bottom part of chemtrails page at KillerSpray} gives the gov the right to kill you by this poison. You agreed via AQUIESCENCE cuz they posted it somewhere publicly and it was not contested! 1992 AGENDA21 was crafted, it is the population reduction agenda

Read between the lines folks. The Gulf of Mexico is being terraformed into a blue/green algae farm to harvest ethanol which can be converted to JP-8 jet fuel among other things. The carbon capture they are talking about comes from the oil refineries in Texas, Louisiana, and Alabama. The Macondo/corexit scenario is meant to drive out the fishermen, the sea life and any other competing interests that would thwart the powers that be from converting the gulf into a dead zone that could support algae with the polluted nitrogen runoff from the Mississippi and other manmade polutants along the coast.

As much as I want to agree this UN decision has to do with chemtrails it actually doesn’t. Read the report again and the excerpts on this page – not one single mention of chemtrails – it is all to do with bioengineering the ocean. Totally different. What’s the point of jumping to the wrong conclusion?

[1] Without prejudice to future deliberations on the definition of geo-engineering activities, understanding that any technologies that deliberately reduce solar insolation or increase carbon sequestration from the atmosphere on a large scale that may affect biodiversity…

They never mention ‘chemtrails’.
Is the reduction of global warming their supposed purpose today, and not immunosuppression/chemical weapons testing/weather manipulation/depopulation/mind control/etc/etc? If so, then yes, they ‘would’ fall into this category, but so do many other things. Lets be clear, if this UN resolution was aimed at banning ‘chemtrailing’ it would say so explicitly.
But it doesn’t. The word does not appear even once. I can’t change that fact, and neither can you.
Also, your header image ‘chemtrails_rainbow_bluebeam.jpg’ is actually a misidentified and widely understood optical phenomenon in ice crystals, known as a ‘circumhorizontal arc’ filmed June 2006 over Idaho.

“Chemtrails” is the popular term, not the scientific term. Read the excerpts from the Agreement in the article above (and note my previous comment where I quoted the relevant portion). Reasonable minds concur this moratorium covers chemtrails.

You won’t find any death certificates that list “heart attack” as the cause of death, either — not because nobody dies from “heart attacks”, but because doctors use the medical term for it (myocardial infarction).

“Since then, attention has turned to a range of futuristic proposals to block a percentage of solar radiation via large-scale interventions in the atmosphere, stratosphere and outer space that would alter global temperatures and precipitation patterns.” – THIS IS how the geoengineers describe the “chemtrail” process.

I suggest to watch What in the World Are They Spraying to hear that very same phrase from the geo’s mouths.

I would like to know when this ban is meant to be in place! As they are Still Spraying in Ireland! It has to stop!!! They are destroy our soil, our health and our environment! What do we have to do?? Shoot them down??? It may come to that if they don’t stop!

Marcelo:: I live in Tulsa Oklahoma. Trails, like tic tac toe, have been sprayed since 2010. Longer, that is just when I noticed the long clouds. As an USAF Veteran, I know a cloud and a chemtrail. What I do not know is what to do about it, help me.

strangely weird red/orange evening skies here in ireland too lately and one morning about ten days ago excessively weird….
and that solitary so-called bright star in the southern sky that used to appear every second evening on the dot like clockwork and would sometimes suddenly start zig-zagging, now appears nearly every night, moving from east to west and back again…

This is one reason we all have to stand together and get as much money out of the hands of these elitist who are striving for global governance. No more taxes. The cap and trade bill tax will only give these egotist more money to run these project of geo-engineered climate control or bio-engineering the ocean for fuel and many other projects that are destroying the earth that they think they are so clever to create. They manipulated the economic crash to get more money into their hands. They are capable of doing most anything they want as long as they have money. They make us fall prey to their excuses of saving us from global warming or economic disaster, so we keep handing them more money. No more taxes. No more government control. We have done a good enough job in the private sector to harm ourselves and our earth, we certainly don’t need the power hungry government elitist to come and finish us off.

The more who recognize that government is no longer legitimate, the more free people there are in the world. To delegitimize the system, I like Zeitgeist‘s 6 suggestions:

1. stop paying taxes
2. withdraw your money from the Big Banks
3. do not join the military (or police, I would add)
4. boycott corporate mainstream media
5. reduce your energy use; convert to renewable energy as much as possible
6. encourage others to do the same

I would also add:

1. provide for your own defense
2. provide your own food and/or buy local
3. consume way less

This is a No-Brainer. Non-GMO premium corn genetics are designed for yield, with no compromise for standability or drydown. Products are always carefully chosen to match trait rotation systems, IRM refuge areas, and premium markets. Let the world know!

This nopalea stuff that I keep seeing on night time tv is pretty interesting.
Can you imagine drinking the juice from the fruit of the nopal cactus. I called the 800 number and they gave me a free bottle. LOL dont rush for the phone because it was NASTY..

contrailscience.com explains all the misunderstandings about the Chemtrail HOAX.

Yes, I said HOAX. It started around 1998 and has been repeated blindly and spread in the face of clear disproof since then.

If you have one piece of evidence which is verifiable, incontrovertible, based on peer-reviewed, experimentally repeatable science, and well understood and interdependent laws of physics, then present it. You will win over thousands of skeptical scientists, the world over.

This is the standard of evidence required by the scientific community, and hence it should be your standard too. Without it you have nothing.

Well, it’s not my website, just one which I like to direct people to when they’re misinformed about the properties of condensation trails.

The main error I’ll happily point out from your site is persistence. The first report of a contrail, persisting for at least 20 minutes alone, before drifting and merging with the adjacent cirrus, is found in the U.S. Air Service Newsletter:http://contrailscience.com/files/mwr-049-07-0412c.pdf

I’m glad you want to rely on the statements given in the CO report, as they also confirm this. On page 27 and 28 it states, “If liquid H2O saturation is reached in the plume, a contrail forms. Ice particles are created in the contrail mainly by freezing of exhaust particles. Scavenging of exhaust particles and further deposition of H2O leads to an increase of the ice mass. The contrail persists in ice-supersaturated air and may develop into a cirrus cloud.”

of course, most people who are caught in the hoax have been told that some condensation trails have been proven to persist in conditions unfavourable to their formation, such as extremely low saturations. ‘Proven’ implies there isexperimental evidence. If you, or anyone you know, has atmospheric data from a contrail forming layer which disagrees with known atmospheric science, I know thousands of qualified meteorologists – myself included – who would happily use it to treat this hoax as something more than a series of repeated misunderstandings.

Chemtrails are terrible for the planent. The planent has all of the abilities to take care of itself and spraying chemtrails is just destroying things. I wish Chemtrails would be banned EVERYWHERE!. I’m pretty sure that Chemtrails may cause respiratory problems and probably even many more problems. Well the people who agree to spread that crap should also know they are damaging their own body as welll when they breathe that stuff in.

Height or retardation right there! Hey if I take a piss in the ocean in Africa do you think it will pollute the beach in California? Seriously you think evaporating a jar of vinegar will effect a cloud covering 40sqm 30,000 feet up?? I thik I study needs to be done on the psyche of chemtrail believers because I hazard a guess the majority of you resemble all the hallmarks of paranoid delusion disorder.

Why cant you retards get your head around the difference between contrails and geo engineering? They are on completely different scales In FACT they do completely different things! Contrail cirrus WARMS THE PLANET UP! Remember in year 6 when they explained why deserts can fluctuate temp from 50deg in the day to minus of a night? CLOUD COVER! Even your fellow chemtard supporters like Rosalind Peterson have realized this! The geo engineering they are PROPOSING is to block the sun entirely in the UPPER STRATOSPHERE. Planes dont even fly there. I mean you guys seem to think you are all awake yet you are distracted by clouds! The whole time we continue to rape our earth daily with the way US AS INDIVIDUALS live! No one is “spraying” anything, you just want to believe and cast blame on the evil government for doing what you are in fact responsible for. I have never in my life seen a bigger group of blind easily led retards in my life. The scary thing is you all actually think you have asked the right questions,NO you have stopped asking questions as soon as you found your little group of followers that agree with you so you feel secure. Dont EVER laugh at religions of any nature because the “movement” of yours has all the hallmarks of a new religion. If you want the reason for the change in contrails, both in the frequency and the fact they persist more than before google Jerry E Smith chemtrails. He is an advocate against weather modification and has done more than any or you lot whining on the internet about clouds that look strange to you. Pull your heads out of you know where and go back to fighting REAL ISSUES, remember those, de forestation, over fishing, the government holding back clean energy solutions, WAR..FFS bunch of freeking twats!

Once you are a CNA you can advance in a healthcare career by becoming a RN (Registered Nurse) or even by attending school to become a doctor.

Working as a nursing assistant gives you an excellent starting point which is another reason to
consider training as a nursing assistant. The best way to stay competitive is to keep your resume active
by acquiring supplementary training.

I think that if I wanted to control the people of earth, I would spray the skies with nano robots. Also, with metal chemicals and nano-crystal {cordless electricity} now available, I would be able to turn a person off/on